UAL/CAL ARBITOR ruling submitted on 70 seater
12-31-2010, 12:36 PM
#41
Moderate Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Spelling, Proof-Reading, and Semantics
The Thread Title: "ARBITOR"
Closest in the dictionary: Arbiter; a referee for sporting events. OK, I can grant you, it is sort of a sporting event.
Direct from ALPA, today:
Artibrator Rules in Favor of ALPA on Scope Case
Art-i-brator? Is that something for reviving dead paintings and statues?
Clear!!
Closest in the dictionary: Arbiter; a referee for sporting events. OK, I can grant you, it is sort of a sporting event.
Direct from ALPA, today:
Artibrator Rules in Favor of ALPA on Scope Case
Art-i-brator? Is that something for reviving dead paintings and statues?
Clear!!
12-31-2010, 12:58 PM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: 737 CAPT
Posts: 1,905
Now comes the management spin: "We are saddened that the Continental pilots do not wish to see their airline be successful and that they've decided to impede us in this way. We don't know what their problem is with 70 seat RJ's, they're a wonderful tool to provide service to our customers."
I haven't seen enough coming from the union to emphasize that CAL pilots would love to fly the RJ's themselves and don't see why that flying has to be outsourced. I've noticed management and their toadie analysts keep spinning the propaganda that mainline pilots have a problem with RJ's and that they think 737's and A320's ought to be flying the RJ routes. That's not what we want and we can't let them get away with spinning that nonsense.
I haven't seen enough coming from the union to emphasize that CAL pilots would love to fly the RJ's themselves and don't see why that flying has to be outsourced. I've noticed management and their toadie analysts keep spinning the propaganda that mainline pilots have a problem with RJ's and that they think 737's and A320's ought to be flying the RJ routes. That's not what we want and we can't let them get away with spinning that nonsense.
I saw Loren, oops, I mean Smisek quoted as saying that CAL was at a disadvantage because the pilot contract wouldn't allow the company to use small jets bigger than 50-seats. That is a blatantly misleading statement, and he knows it. CALALPA should have immediately responded:
"Mr. Smisek has misunderstood the content of the CALALPA work agreement. There is nothing in the contract preventing the company from utilizing 51+ seat jets in its network. What the contract does state is that the company cannot subcontract this out to other airlines to do the flying. This flying must be done using Continental pilots.
We fully understand and see the benefit the use of these airplanes can bring to the Continental network, our passengers and our company. We stand ready to discuss the opportunities these aircraft can provide to Continental and our pilots any time Mr. Smisek wishes to meet."
12-31-2010, 01:48 PM
#43
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
Absolutely fantastic news! Awesome to see an ALPA unit with some cajones (get it? unit? cajones? tee hee) and stand up for the career!
The only way we will get any semblence of a good career back is be reeling in outsourcing.. this is one heck of a first step.
The only way we will get any semblence of a good career back is be reeling in outsourcing.. this is one heck of a first step.
12-31-2010, 01:59 PM
#44
On Reserve
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 12
Hello everyone. I'm just a PP but I love to read the forums and see what I'm getting into. But anyway, here is my question regarding the ruling (which I'm very happy):
Does the current Draconian UAL C2003 have any limits on the amount of outsourcing that UAL can do? I think I read here that. In any case, can UALPA take the Company to arbitration if they exceed the amount of outsourcing currently allowed by the contract?
And I hope everyone have a Happy 2011 and a JCBA that kicks ass.
Does the current Draconian UAL C2003 have any limits on the amount of outsourcing that UAL can do? I think I read here that. In any case, can UALPA take the Company to arbitration if they exceed the amount of outsourcing currently allowed by the contract?
And I hope everyone have a Happy 2011 and a JCBA that kicks ass.
12-31-2010, 02:00 PM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: B777 FO
Posts: 240
Here is an article about it with managements reply.
Related News:Transportation · U.S. .United Can't Use Continental Code With 70-Seat Jets, Arbitrator Determines
By Mary Jane Credeur - Dec 31, 2010 1:07 PM ET
inShare.More
Business ExchangeBuzz up!DiggPrint Email .United Continental Holdings Inc. can’t use the Continental Airlines code on 70-seat jets operated by its regional partners because a labor contract requires planes of that size to be flown by Continental pilots, an arbitrator ruled.
Continental pilots filed a grievance about United’s plans to add Continental’s code on a few dozen flights from Continental hubs such as New Jersey’s Newark and Houston airports starting in January, and an arbitrator, Richard I. Bloch, found in favor of the pilots in a ruling yesterday.
Continental pilots have a “scope clause” in their contract that requires planes with 51 or more seats to be flown by Continental pilots, not regional partners such as SkyWest Inc., while the United contract has a scope of 71 seats. United wanted to move some 70-seat jets to Continental hubs and add Continental’s code, prompting an objection by the pilots.
United will still be able to operate the 70-seat regional jets at Newark and Houston using its own code, said Julie King, a spokeswoman for the Chicago-based carrier.
“Although we disagree with the arbitrator’s decision, we will comply with the ruling,” King said. “We are pleased that this decision will permit the company to redeploy 70-seat aircraft in certain markets under the United Express brand to better meet demand and improve profitability of the combined company.”
Separate Airlines
Routes include Newark-Atlanta, Newark-Detroit, Houston- Colorado Springs and Houston-Dallas Fort Worth, she said.
United Airlines parent UAL Corp. merged with Continental Airlines Inc. in October in an all-stock deal valued at $3.47 billion. They must operate as separate airlines until they are granted a joint operating certificate by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration at the end of 2011.
United Continental management and the pilots for both carriers jointly filed for mediation in their contract talks for a new collective bargaining agreement on Dec. 17.
Related News:Transportation · U.S. .United Can't Use Continental Code With 70-Seat Jets, Arbitrator Determines
By Mary Jane Credeur - Dec 31, 2010 1:07 PM ET
inShare.More
Business ExchangeBuzz up!DiggPrint Email .United Continental Holdings Inc. can’t use the Continental Airlines code on 70-seat jets operated by its regional partners because a labor contract requires planes of that size to be flown by Continental pilots, an arbitrator ruled.
Continental pilots filed a grievance about United’s plans to add Continental’s code on a few dozen flights from Continental hubs such as New Jersey’s Newark and Houston airports starting in January, and an arbitrator, Richard I. Bloch, found in favor of the pilots in a ruling yesterday.
Continental pilots have a “scope clause” in their contract that requires planes with 51 or more seats to be flown by Continental pilots, not regional partners such as SkyWest Inc., while the United contract has a scope of 71 seats. United wanted to move some 70-seat jets to Continental hubs and add Continental’s code, prompting an objection by the pilots.
United will still be able to operate the 70-seat regional jets at Newark and Houston using its own code, said Julie King, a spokeswoman for the Chicago-based carrier.
“Although we disagree with the arbitrator’s decision, we will comply with the ruling,” King said. “We are pleased that this decision will permit the company to redeploy 70-seat aircraft in certain markets under the United Express brand to better meet demand and improve profitability of the combined company.”
Separate Airlines
Routes include Newark-Atlanta, Newark-Detroit, Houston- Colorado Springs and Houston-Dallas Fort Worth, she said.
United Airlines parent UAL Corp. merged with Continental Airlines Inc. in October in an all-stock deal valued at $3.47 billion. They must operate as separate airlines until they are granted a joint operating certificate by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration at the end of 2011.
United Continental management and the pilots for both carriers jointly filed for mediation in their contract talks for a new collective bargaining agreement on Dec. 17.
12-31-2010, 02:48 PM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 325
Actually you wouldn't have to recheck bags, united can use the interline agreements not codeshare and the passenger can have their bags checked thru to their destination. Just like going on orbitz and flying delta on one leg, American on the next then united express on the last leg.
12-31-2010, 03:25 PM
#47
Pura Vida
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Jorge Alfa
Posts: 198
.
12-31-2010, 04:06 PM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ca...bagtags-4.html
In typical fashion, management will just up the frequency of the 50/70 seat equipment. Then market it as "increased service". And deal with the fallout/poop storm that results fromthe frequency but overall capacity loss of trying to run flights between two very busy, and often delayed airports.
12-31-2010, 04:15 PM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 655
Actually you wouldn't have to recheck bags, united can use the interline agreements not codeshare and the passenger can have their bags checked thru to their destination. Just like going on orbitz and flying delta on one leg, American on the next then united express on the last leg.
Congrats guys on standing firm. Hopefully it will be a sign of things to come.
12-31-2010, 05:18 PM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Left - Dodge Caravan
Posts: 357
...
"Mr. Smisek has misunderstood the content of the CALALPA work agreement. There is nothing in the contract preventing the company from utilizing 51+ seat jets in its network. What the contract does state is that the company cannot subcontract this out to other airlines to do the flying. This flying must be done using Continental pilots.
We fully understand and see the benefit the use of these airplanes can bring to the Continental network, our passengers and our company. We stand ready to discuss the opportunities these aircraft can provide to Continental and our pilots any time Mr. Smisek wishes to meet."
"Mr. Smisek has misunderstood the content of the CALALPA work agreement. There is nothing in the contract preventing the company from utilizing 51+ seat jets in its network. What the contract does state is that the company cannot subcontract this out to other airlines to do the flying. This flying must be done using Continental pilots.
We fully understand and see the benefit the use of these airplanes can bring to the Continental network, our passengers and our company. We stand ready to discuss the opportunities these aircraft can provide to Continental and our pilots any time Mr. Smisek wishes to meet."
SP
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
